Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
|
View Poll Results: To what extent has "Mark" used/misused David as a source for Jesus Passion | |||
Completely | 2 | 100.00% | |
Mostly | 0 | 0% | |
Significantly | 0 | 0% | |
Partially | 0 | 0% | |
Hardly | 0 | 0% | |
Zero | 0 | 0% | |
Voters: 2. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
07-21-2012, 09:27 PM | #1 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nazareth
Posts: 2,357
|
The Lord Sent to my lord jUPSalms. David as Model for "Mark's" Jesus' Passion
JW:
I think everyone would agree here that David from the Jewish Bible is a source for "Mark's" Jesus' Passion. The better question though, and one which C-BS tries to avoid, is to what extent David from the Jewish Bible was a source for "Mark's" Jesus' Passion. Several threads here recently have illustrated the C-BS position that the supposed lack of Messianic Passion in the Jewish Bible is proof/key evidence of HPJ (historically passionate Jesus). The serious student should know by now though that this is a Literary Criticism and that without any quality Source Criticism to support it, can not prove anything. Measuring the extent to which "Mark's" Jesus' Passion has a source of the Jewish Bible is also a Literary Criticism and thus has the potential to swing this category of evidence to MJ, depending on the extent. I foresee confusion here as to the combination of my claim that this thread is not about Source Criticism and my continued use of the word "source" referring here to the Jewish Bible. "Source Criticism" refers to the author, "Mark", of which we know little. Interestingly/ironically Jesus' Teaching & Healing Ministry, which was impossible, was presented by "Mark" as relatively unimportant while the Passion Ministry was presented as the important part, which was possible (but implausible). The extent of contrivance is another type of Literary Criticism but this thread will be dedicated to the source issue above. I have faith that believers here as well as Skeptics will be surprised at the extent to which "Mark's" Passion has a source of the Jewish Bible. I've already indicated that "Mark's" source for Jesus' baptism was David receiving the spirit and than being driven to fight Goliath verses tested by Satan. For starters though this thread will only look at the Psalms as source for the Passion. Joseph |
07-22-2012, 10:50 AM | #2 | |||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nazareth
Posts: 2,357
|
JW:
Stephen Ahearne-Kroll has written the related book: The Psalms of Lament in Mark's Passion: Jesus' Davidic Suffering (Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series) Amazon link (or via: amazon.co.uk) which can be purchased for your PC for $ 13 (cheap). The strength of the book is the objective determination of parallels between "Mark's" Jesus' Passion and the Psalms. The weakness is that the book carries all the (mis)assumptions of C-BS concerning the significance of the parallels. For starters Kroll assumes the Passion is 14.1 to 16:8. As a side note, regarding 16:8 as the original ending, note that it supports the Tragedy of the entire Passion, while the Forged Ending completely undoes the Tragedy. From the start of "Mark's" Passion Kroll notes the first quality parallel to a Psalm in 14:10-21: http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_14 Quote:
1) Meal with associates. 2) Handing over by a close associate. 3) Deliverance to enemies He notes that all three figure prominently in Psalm 41: http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Psalms_41 Quote:
Also note that 14:1-9 has parallels to the Psalm with the enemies plotting and invocation of "sickness" and "poor". Kroll Karries the C-BS assumption that "Mark's" entire Passion is based on prior stories but fails to notice that there are no such extant stories. He also fails to point out that what is extant support for a source is Paul: http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php...Corinthians_11 Quote:
For the Son of man goeth, even as it is written of him Explicitly iding the source as Scripture. Thus all known evidence supports Paul as providing the key assertions here and "Mark" using those assertions for his theme and than using the Jewish Bible to create a related narrative for at least part of his Passion narrative. The remaining question is, to what extent? Joseph |
|||
07-22-2012, 02:41 PM | #3 | ||
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
The author of the short gMark did NOT use any assertions of the Pauline writings. 1. The term "Son of man" in gMark is NOT from the Pauline writings. 2. The term "Jesus of Nazareth" in gMark is NOT from the Pauline writings. 3. The miracles of Jesus in gMark is NOT found in the Pauline writings. 4. The claim in gMark that Jesus did NOT want the Jews to be converted is NOT in the Pauline writings. 5. The claim in gMark that Jesus Deliberately spoke in Parables so that the Outsiders would NOT understand him is NOT found in the Pauline writings. 6. The claim in gMark that Jesus did NOT want anyone to know he was the Christ is NOT in the Pauline writings. 7. The events at the arrest of Jesus in gMark is NOT in the Pauline writings. 8. The events at the trial by the Sanhedrin in gMark is NOT from the Pauline writings. 9. The events at the trial under Pilate in gMark is NOT from the Pauline writings. 10. The events at the PASSION in gMark is NOWHERE at all in the Pauline writings. 11. Passages from PSALMS 22 relating to the Passion in gMark are NOT even quoted in the Pauline writings. 12. The author of gMark did NOT claim that Jesus DIED and Resurrected for the Sins of all mankind as stated in the Pauline writings. The short gMark did NOT use the Pauline letters at all for his Passion. The author clearly used the Psalms and the "Autobiography of Josephus". The Life of Flavius Josephus 75 Quote:
|
||
07-23-2012, 08:09 AM | #4 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nazareth
Posts: 2,357
|
JW:
As previously noted Psalm 41 has good parallels to Mark 14:1-25. Continuing with Mark 14, Kroll notes that the Gethsemane scene 32-42 has a reMarkable thematic parallel with Psalms 41 and 42 in that the base for both is a prayer to God for deliverance said 3 times. The reMarkable individual parallels are: 1) "Mark" here has implications that Jesus is a sinner, "take the Cup away", "not my will", "the flesh is weak" which matches the repentant sinner of 41/42. As otherwise showing Jesus Christ (not just "Jesus") as innocent of sin is such a major theme of "Mark" the inescapable conclusion is that showing his Jesus narrative as based on David was more important to him than any other theme. 2) The sorrowful/distressed theme = "My tears have been my food day and night", "pour out my soul within me." 3) The questioning of God, ending with trust in God = "I will say unto God my rock, Why hast thou forgotten me? Why go I mourning because of the oppression of the enemy?/Why art thou cast down, O my soul? And why art thou disquieted within me? Hope thou in God; for I shall yet praise him, [Who is] the help of my countenance, and my God." Bonus material for Vorkosigan = Note that for Chapter 14, the parallels are there to David when "Mark's" current narrative is not a fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy. The prophecy is from the Jewish Bible, thus the parallels. When the current narrative fulfills a prophecy of Jesus, there is no parallel to the Jewish Bible. Note that the first part of Chapter 14 not paralleled to David is 14:11-16 which contains a prophecy fulfillment of Jesus. The same is true of the rest of Chapter 14. Now for God's sake, will you please continue your Markan Commentary sight so you can inventory this brilliant observation. Joseph |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|